map showing every US soldier killed in Afghanistan and Iraq

jGilder · Post by **jGilder** » Wed Jul 06, 2005 1:39 pm

EricWingler wrote:If you want to make a map with lots of dots on it, make a map of the US that shows the location of each alcohol related traffic death. I think the number is approximately 25,000 (a year). Of course, no one will be disturbed by this because we all know that people choose to get mowed down by a drunk driver. (Insert sarcasm emoticon here.)

Oh of course, thanks Eric. Death is so meaningless when you look at the statistics like that. We can all just relax and forget about the whole thing now I suppose. :roll:

EricWingler · Post by **EricWingler** » Thu Jul 07, 2005 8:41 am

jGilder wrote:
EricWingler wrote:If you want to make a map with lots of dots on it, make a map of the US that shows the location of each alcohol related traffic death. I think the number is approximately 25,000 (a year). Of course, no one will be disturbed by this because we all know that people choose to get mowed down by a drunk driver. (Insert sarcasm emoticon here.)
Oh of course, thanks Eric. Death is so meaningless when you look at the statistics like that. We can all just relax and forget about the whole thing now I suppose. :roll:

My point was not that death is meaningless. It is that we strain out gnats while swallowing a camel. While there should be outrage that so many die on the roads each year--many of these deaths entirely preventable--there is instead an acceptance that such events just happen.

jGilder · Post by **jGilder** » Thu Jul 07, 2005 11:52 am

EricWingler wrote:
jGilder wrote:
EricWingler wrote:If you want to make a map with lots of dots on it, make a map of the US that shows the location of each alcohol related traffic death. I think the number is approximately 25,000 (a year). Of course, no one will be disturbed by this because we all know that people choose to get mowed down by a drunk driver. (Insert sarcasm emoticon here.)
Oh of course, thanks Eric. Death is so meaningless when you look at the statistics like that. We can all just relax and forget about the whole thing now I suppose. :roll:
My point was not that death is meaningless. It is that we strain out gnats while swallowing a camel. While there should be outrage that so many die on the roads each year--many of these deaths entirely preventable--there is instead an acceptance that such events just happen.

The effort to do something about it is in high gear as far as I can tell. The punishment for DUI has been on the increase, and the rate of DUI incidents, even though it's too high, has been going down as a result. (I haven't researched this, my opinion here is based on impression from hearing about it on the TV news.) The point is that there is no "acceptance" and people seem to be working hard trying to prevent it.

izzarina · Post by **izzarina** » Thu Jul 07, 2005 11:57 am

jGilder wrote:
EricWingler wrote:
jGilder wrote: Oh of course, thanks Eric. Death is so meaningless when you look at the statistics like that. We can all just relax and forget about the whole thing now I suppose. :roll:
My point was not that death is meaningless. It is that we strain out gnats while swallowing a camel. While there should be outrage that so many die on the roads each year--many of these deaths entirely preventable--there is instead an acceptance that such events just happen.
The effort to do something about it is in high gear as far as I can tell. The punishment for DUI has been on the increase, and the rate of DUI incidents, even though it's too high, has been going down as a result. (I haven't researched this, my opinion here is based on impression from hearing about it on the TV news.) The point is that there is no "acceptance" and people seem to be working hard trying to prevent it.

But also it seems to me (and you all can correct me if I am wrong) that this is more like comparing apples to oranges. I don't see what your comparison here has to do at all with the deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those deaths were pretty darn preventable too, and yet too many Americans accept it as no big deal, while as jGilder pointed out, much IS being done to prevent drunk driving.

EricWingler · Post by **EricWingler** » Fri Jul 08, 2005 8:44 am

izzarina wrote:
But also it seems to me (and you all can correct me if I am wrong) that this is more like comparing apples to oranges. I don't see what your comparison here has to do at all with the deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those deaths were pretty darn preventable too, and yet too many Americans accept it as no big deal, while as jGilder pointed out, much IS being done to prevent drunk driving.

I don't think that many Americans view the deaths in Iraq as "no big deal", nor do I think that they view the deaths on Sept. 11, 2001 as no big deal. Many deaths in Iraq were prevented. After all, several hundreds of thousands of troops were sent into Iraq, and several hundreds of thousands of these were not killed. But in any war there will be deaths. Perhaps we could prevent these deaths by avoiding war, but it is not entirely evident that this would be the case. As an analogy, we could prevent the deaths of our policemen simply by doing away with law enforcement entirely. We could negotiate with criminals and they would leave us alone, right?

I'm grateful that I am not president. I would not want to make the tough decisions George Bush has had to make, knowing that no matter what decision he makes it will be wrong.

The Weekenders · Post by **The Weekenders** » Fri Jul 08, 2005 9:23 am

Winston Churchill wouldn't have lasted five minutes in power with the current ethos.

TomB · Post by **TomB** » Fri Jul 08, 2005 9:43 am

EricWingler wrote:
izzarina wrote:
But also it seems to me (and you all can correct me if I am wrong) that this is more like comparing apples to oranges. I don't see what your comparison here has to do at all with the deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those deaths were pretty darn preventable too, and yet too many Americans accept it as no big deal, while as jGilder pointed out, much IS being done to prevent drunk driving.
I don't think that many Americans view the deaths in Iraq as "no big deal", nor do I think that they view the deaths on Sept. 11, 2001 as no big deal. Many deaths in Iraq were prevented. After all, several hundreds of thousands of troops were sent into Iraq, and several hundreds of thousands of these were not killed. But in any war there will be deaths. Perhaps we could prevent these deaths by avoiding war, but it is not entirely evident that this would be the case. As an analogy, we could prevent the deaths of our policemen simply by doing away with law enforcement entirely. We could negotiate with criminals and they would leave us alone, right?

I'm grateful that I am not president. I would not want to make the tough decisions George Bush has had to make, knowing that no matter what decision he makes it will be wrong.

Of course, you are mixing in so many scenarios that you blur the entire point you are trying to make.

First of all, why throw 9/11 in when talking about deaths in Iraq. Iraq had little, if anything to do with 9/11. We did not go into Iraq to take care of the insurgents who were responsible for 9/11. If we had gone full out into Afghanistan, then people were complaining about the deaths being for nothing, you might have an argument, but not when it comes to the war in Iraq.

As for your thoughts on "avoiding war" you're right, that wouldn't prevent needless deaths. However, it would be nice "better" if we were at war with those responsible, that might make the deaths more meaningful, so to speak.

In regards to the President, I agree with you on one point- I'm glad I'm not him either.

All the Best,

Tom

Tyler · Post by **Tyler** » Fri Jul 08, 2005 9:50 am

TomB wrote: As for your thoughts on "avoiding war" you're right, that wouldn't prevent needless deaths. However, it would be nice "better" if we were at war with those responsible, that might make the deaths more meaningful, so to speak.

Tom

Give the sacrifices some meaning, it would.
I've been opposed to the war all along, but now that it has taken a friend of mine I find myself even more furious.

This is kind of along the topic, but it brought some bittersweet humour to my situation. I should be greatful that I can laugh at it....did anyone see the "Saddama bin Laden" skit on Mad TV the other Saturday? Funny as it was, it really did comment on the logic, or lack thereof, of being in Iraq.

(edited for spelling)

izzarina · Post by **izzarina** » Fri Jul 08, 2005 9:50 am

EricWingler wrote:I don't think that many Americans view the deaths in Iraq as "no big deal"

You obviously are not speaking to the same people I am speaking to. When I get statements like "More people die in Philadelphia every day than die in Iraq" (which in of itself is a ridiculous statement) you can't help but come away feeling that these people really don't care. In fact, in the wake of September 11, there are many, MANY people who feel that Middle Eastern lives are very much expendable and we should just "blow them off the map" and get it over with. I have been told way too many times that we should just nuke the hell out of them all because of what "they" did to us. Statements like this show, without a doubt, that there is very little value placed upon the lives of the Iraqi people, and that is just sickening to me.

Tyler · Post by **Tyler** » Fri Jul 08, 2005 9:59 am

izzarina wrote:
EricWingler wrote:I don't think that many Americans view the deaths in Iraq as "no big deal"
You obviously are not speaking to the same people I am speaking to. When I get statements like "More people die in Philadelphia every day than die in Iraq" (which in of itself is a ridiculous statement) you can't help but come away feeling that these people really don't care. In fact, in the wake of September 11, there are many, MANY people who feel that Middle Eastern lives are very much expendable and we should just "blow them off the map" and get it over with. I have been told way too many times that we should just nuke the hell out of them all because of what "they" did to us. Statements like this show, without a doubt, that there is very little value placed upon the lives of the Iraqi people, and that is just sickening to me.

arent they human lives, after all? And who is there that can put a value on a living person? Anyone who feels that they can is diluding themselves from a position of supposed authority or superiority.
We cant change the actions of people, but we should not let the actions of others dictate what our reactions will be.
My friend used to send me emails about how well he was treated by the Iraqi people, tales of their humanity from a first person POV. In my travels I have yet to go to the middle east, but I have been to enough places in this world to understand that people are people, the same as the rest of us; I am no better than people in Ecuador still living in huts, nor is the President any better than I or anyone else and to presume that we can sweep in and take as many lives as we wish for no good reason whatsoever is to invite folly.